Skip to main content

About your Search

20121121
20121129
STATION
MSNBCW 5
CNNW 3
CSPAN 1
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 16
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)
. "the communicators" airs tonight on c-span. >> last week, he talked about the strategy toward al qaeda. this is about one hour and 15 minutes. >> good evening. thank you for coming. it is an honor to be introducing my boss. he is one of the most respected and experienced hands in washington. his reputation is legendary. he's chairman of the house budget committee when the actually passed a budget. his chief of staff to president clinton in the white house. now secretary of defense. what in the world are you going to do next? this is not action do justice to the man. leon panetta is a wonderful human being and in some ways a man of contrasts. i am going to give you examples. he is known among his counterparts around the world for his warm italian bear hugs. he is also known for the laser light focus he displayed on hunting down osama bin laden. he often holds meetings in his pentagon office with his dog curled up around his feet as he is pressing a commander on how a war plan is going to advance or how they are going to make more progress. when traveling, who he is known to hang out in
denied al qaeda's lead role in the attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi that cost the lives of ambassador chris stevens and three others and she did so knowing it was true. well, the man who defeated mccain in the 2008 presidential campaign takes this as a personal shot at him. how will he respond? will he name ambassador rice his new secretary of state to replace hillary clinton? will he meet mccain's challenge head on and send rice up to the capitol to go face-to-face with the enemy? tonight we study the battlefield and the firepower of the two sides in this year-ending fire fight. mccain sure wants this fight, but do his fellow republicans? do they want an older white guy taking on the competence of a young woman of color, a rhodes scholar of solid reputation? most important, what end does the president want for this match of fact and wits? i'm joined by michael o'hanlon of the brookings institution and jonathan landay. the intelligence reporter for mcclatchy newspapers. michael, thank you for this. i want to get to the facts. am i right, is the main charge here coming fr
on those sunday talk shows. why she did not mention al qaeda, not just that -- because we understand now that she didn't mention it because she was told that that was classified and she was given unclassified talking points and that's what she read from. the bigger question they have, we're told, is why she went further and said that the obama administration has decimated al qaeda and whether or not she said that knowing the classified information, which suggested that al qaeda might have been behind or at least an affiliate of al qaeda might have been behind this attack in benghazi. >> it will be an interesting morning on the hill. >> this is ridiculous. first of all, she wasn't secretary of state. you have critics who don't want to mention secretary of state clinton, didn't want to mention petraeus when it came to the cia. and they want to zero in on somebody who frankly was sent out on television who was not even over the ambassador. >> are we seeing here, basically, the end game on this? will this resolve these issues? do we think that basically we're going to expect to see her nomin
! >> stephanie: the original assessment of the benghazi attack was it was carried out by al-qaeda affiliated groups. he said that analysis was taken out after an interagency review in favor of a more general review that they did not tip off terrorists to u.s. knowledge of the matter. we already covered this. general petraeus and now other intelligence officials are just -- you know, making it even clearer. so let's see. john mccain, lindsey graham, blah blah, have accused the white house of stripping for political reasons. the director of the c.i.a. and now current intelligence officials have said no. intelligence agencies changed it not the white house. i don't understand why we're even talking about this still. let's see. he said the intelligence community made substantial analytical changes with the talking points were sent to the government agency, partners for their feedback. there were no substantive changes made to the talking points after they left the intelligence community. period. another anonymous official ec
groups in libya. we did nothing to help them. as a result of that the al qaeda and those affiliated groups have undue influence and the benghazi debacle is a result of that. bill: can we do anything about that when you consider the politics operating internally within these countries? >> in my own mind there is plenty we can do. right now engage in libya and let's get a security force and let's start gaining some control in that country and pushing back on the radicals. let's choose a side on the war taking place in syria and start helping the moderate rebels. even the united kingdom is looking towards doing something like that. why sit on the fence and turn it over to the rad cat islamists and the al qaeda which may be the case. bill: there is a power vacuum in the world. that's clear to see. jack keane, i appreciate your analysis. martha: coming up, a lurid tale of money and murder as a woman goes on trial accused of defriending a jackpot -- befriending a jackpot winner. she conned him out of the money and then she killed them. the drama that's unfolding in court. >> i'm telling y
to do with them. and they are the ones who removed any mention of al qaeda, not the white house. the president defended ambassador rice at his cabinet meeting today. listen. >> susan rice is extraordinary. couldn't be prouder of the job she has done. [ applause ] >> shepard: while the president has not nominated anybody to replace hillary clinton as secretary of state. she has said she will not stay on for the second term. but the president has called criticism of ambassador rice outrageous and told her critics to go after him instead. that may be what is happening. catherine herridge in the d.c. newsroom tonight. catherine. >> thank you, shepard. rice has met with six senators, five republicans and one independent so far. she has apparently failed to reassure them that she is a responsible choice for secretary of state and not as one critic said drinking every drop of the administration's kool-aid. >> the president is going to have to make the decision about who he nominates to be secretary of state. hopefully it will be someone that is able to both show independence but have t
that never before has there been a weapon that allows us to distinguish more effectively between an al qaeda terrorist and innocent civilians. >> that is the defense of the obama administration today. in essence that this program is so targeted it saves civilian lives. what do you say to that in your case? >> well, i think it's very hard to assess that kind of claim without more information. information that the administration refuses to release. it's very easy for administration officials to make claims like this when there's no possibility that they're going to be held to account for the claims, no possibility that some court is going to order them to disclose information, no possibility that they'll be sksd foll -- asked follow-up questions. part of the reason we are in court asking judges to enforce the freedom of information act, asking judges to disclose more information is to allow the public to better assess the kinds of claims that the administration is now making, usually through unnamed officials in leaks to favored media. >> jodi, do you think this is the area where we've seen pe
that they knew that those with ties to al-qaeda were involved in the attack on the embassy. >> i specifically asked her whether at any point prior to going on those sunday morning television shows she was briefed or urged to say certain things by anybody in the white house related to the campaign or political operations. she said no. she was not given messaging points at all by the white house prior to her appearance on those sunday morning shows. >> it's clear the information she gave the american people was incorrect when she said that it was a spontaneous demonstration triggered by a hateful video. it was not. and there was compelling evidence at the time that that was certainly not the case. >> i'm more concerned now than i was before that the 16 september explanation about how four americans died in benghazi, libya, by ambassador rice i think does not do justice to the reality at the time, and in hindsight clearly was completely wrong. >> there are no unanswered questions about ambassador rice's appearance on sunday shows. the talking points that she used for those appearances that were
in may 2003 that we found the wmds in iraq. dick cheney and condoleezza rice talked about links to al qaeda in iraq. you've never made up for those huge, serious, significant lies in the arena of foreign policy. and now you're picking apart, you know, basically the very early and ultimately not misleading with regard to foreign policy decisions, statements that this diplomat made. >> one thing we're learning right now the meeting with ambassador rice and senator corker is happening as we speak so a little earlier than that noontime appointment. but the one thing we heard also from senator barrasso in the last hour was john considerry's name floated out and it would be easier for him to sail through. you had the opportunity to work with john kerry before. >> sure. >> when we hear about this, is that really what the game, as joy-ann said, this machiavellian game, basically let's get kerry in this position and then scott brown could take over his seat, run for that seat in massachusetts, we get scott brownbach in? >> this is a little delicate because i know so many people involved. this
against al-qaeda and the enemy, but also about erstwhile allies and really mapping the human terrain. >> along that path there had been the hunt for osama bin laden and the first idea for drones came in, and then armed drones. tell us a little about that and why you and your team pushed for that. it was really a product of great frustration, because we had these human sources, these networks in afghanistan reporting on bin laden, on his whereabouts, and we in turn were passing this on to the policymakers in the white house and the department of defense, but we could not get the authorities or the resources to go and engage with lethal force against bin laden. this was pre-9/11. >> uh-huh. >> and they said we needed greater verification. so we looked at all types of technical solutions. we looked at balloons, long-range optics and finally decided on the drone, the predator drone. and can then we, sure enough, driven by our human sources on the ground we found bin laden, very clear video. we knew exactly where he was, farm near kandahar, and then we reported the intelligence. and the r
ago from the former c.i.a. director who said i thought it was al-qaeda within 24 hours. it was edited out. they said, oh, those, i touched it, essentially politics enters in. if she says i went by this paper, what kind secretary of state goes by this paper and doesn't use all her plethora of contacts to find out what the real story is? >> steve: exactly. keep in mind, in addition to the unclassified talking points she works also had access to the classified. so she knew it really was happening. bill o'reilly was talking to john mccain about this last night and here is a little of their conversation. >> is she a dishonest woman, senator? is she dishonest? did she go out there knowing what she said was false and say it anyway? that's the crux of this matter. >> i don't think it was a matter of dishonesty. it was a matter, again, of responsibility. there was plenty of information out there, which she has access to, which contradicted what she said. if you're telling the american people, speaking for the white house, it was the white house that sent her out, off responsibility to make sur
references to al qaeda being involved. so another question for her would clearly be, who changed that, who decided not to include that, right? >> let's come to the second point. that she says she simply read these talking points and if that's true, really poses a much more fundamental question. why did she read the talking points? and it goes to a basic disagreement about how senior officials function in government. there are plenty of people, and i can same secretaries of state, who simply regurgitate what their bureaucracies produced for them, who relied on talking points. talking points were put in front of them and they read them. that is one way to approach government. that is not the way i approached government and got me in considerable trouble from time to time. if that is the way she approached it i think there is question whether from a point of view of judgment that is something that you want to see perpetuated. martha: talk about the politics of all of this for a moment because there's a reason that susan rice requested these meetings with these three senators. we know she is b
, what happened is he told the senators that it was actually the fbi who took al qaeda references out of the unclassified talking points. only to call back several hours later saying, oops, i was wrong, it wasn't the fbi, it was the cia. here is what lindsey graham said about that. >> i can't help but feel incredibly disappointed that we were told something at 10:00 a.m. that couldn't withstand scrutiny for six hours. and is totally inconsistent with what we were told the day before. we have five different explanations of who changed the talking points to take out benghazi. and four different reasons. this is becoming a joke. >> so what these meetings least this particular issue has done is added fuel to the fire and it is not like, you needed to add any more fuel to the fire, especially for senators like lindsey graham who is already really publicly outraged about a lot of issues dealing with the benghazi attack. >> this is just one more. one more. dana bash, thank you. >>> after trashing the hit tv show "two and a half men," the actor angus jones, now back tracking from his controve
that seemed to play down the role of al qaeda terrorists on the attack in benghazi, libya. that attack killed four americans, including u.s. ambassador chris stevens. rice maintains that she made it very clear, the intelligence information she had at the time was preliminary. senators are threatening to block her nomination if president obama chooses her to be his next secretary of state. >>> president obama and vice president joe biden will meet with mexico's president-elect today. pena kneeate toe has a new message. in an editorial in "the washington post" he said the u.s./mexico relations need to go beyond drugs and security concerns. topping his list, deepening economic ties with the united states. >>> the remains of former palestinian leader yasser arafat were exhumed this morning from a mausoleum in the west bank. many palestinians believe that arafat was poisoned by israel when he died in 2004. now, an international team of scientists will analyze tissue samples to see if they contain any traces of a radioactive substance. the actual cause of arafat's death was never determined. >>> th
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)